양도소득세부과처분취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On April 28, 2003, the Plaintiff acquired ownership by winning a successful bid in a voluntary auction procedure with B, 165 square meters, C, 6,146 square meters and D previous 830 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”). The instant land was expropriated in the Korea Land and Housing Corporation on May 30, 2012.
B. On June 27, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a report on capital gains tax on the instant land with necessary expenses of KRW 759,147,400, but filed a request for reduction or correction of capital gains tax on the ground that he/she underreported necessary expenses on November 21, 2012.
From December 17, 2012 to January 5, 2013, the Defendant investigated the transfer income tax on the Plaintiff and corrected the transfer income tax as follows:
C. From April 7, 2014 to April 24, 2014, the Commissioner of the National Tax Service: (a) performed a comprehensive audit on the Defendant with respect to the instant land, and pointed out that it was erroneous that the amount of KRW 2,41,320,00 for which the actual construction was not verified; and (b) the interest paid on the amount borrowed from a financial institution was recognized as necessary expenses, and KRW 97,270,669 for the amount borrowed from the financial institution. Accordingly, the Defendant excluded the aforementioned expenses from necessary expenses and notified the Plaintiff of the transfer income tax for the year 2012 as KRW 1,107,523,150 (including additional taxes) on November 3, 2014.
(hereinafter “instant disposition”) D.
On February 12, 2015, the Plaintiff dissatisfied with the instant disposition and filed an appeal seeking the revocation of the instant disposition with the Tax Tribunal, but the Tax Tribunal respectively filed an appeal with the Plaintiff on May 13, 2015.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 4-1 through 3, Eul evidence 1-3, Eul evidence 6-1, 2-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff asserted 1 paid a total of KRW 2,270,720,560 for the purpose of altering or improving the use of the instant land as civil construction cost, and paid KRW 94,270,669 as interest on loans for the purpose of procuring construction cost.